Jump to content

pilot-76

Baller
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pilot-76

  1. Couldn't agree more on the wim decree video on you tube myself. Now am a bit biased because am belgian and skiing at the place where he started to ski near brussels. But apparently he was skiing 28 off after 2-3 weeks of skiing, a real talent. What I like about his skiing is the fact that it seems to incorporate the best off all styles. He has compressed style but not to the point of tw or mb, his onside is a bit stronger than offside but who's isn't, and he is so damn early, even at 39.5 off. Head and shoulders level all the time, you can see him clearly look down the lake at every turn, which i am told to do as well but that's not everyone's opinion. Still never seen someone go from 28-to 39.5 off that easily. Think he hasn't made it to the absolute top because he is quite handicapped in lenght. (5.7) anyway look it up, even if it is just to compare to the big names... youtube wim decree...
  2. pilot-76

    ABC/123

    I don't know, am not against pp but if where i ski there are so many variables that pp and especially pp star gazer will not give me a good pull. pp sometimes takes someone 3 in bad cases 4 passes to give me a near actual time, and maybe i am really anal or something but feel great that I made my 28 off at 36 until they drop me and I ask the time and they say oh, no wait, it was actually still slow, will increase the next with another 20 rpm. Actaully sold my 1997 sn with star gazer for that matter, would give me actual times 50% of the cases, but the other 50% I still don't know why it would find out mid course it was late, and go to 38+mph to catch up and give me actual time at the end, this was in single magnet mode but completely unskiable. So now with zero off it doesn't matter who is driving me my times are always actual, 2 or 6 ppl in the boat, head wind tail wind pull feels the same every time. So i really like it, with pp my best was 28 at 36 i know it's pathetic but started too late and i only find out now in life i have some pshychomotoric issues :) but with zero off my best has been 28 at 36 as well. Oh did I mention My wife is in love with zero off and thinks it should be the first new purchase for skiing families before opting marriage counseling. And its true lying there in april freezing water and trying to explain that she has to decrease the crew weight, decrease the rpm value and please while your doing that change the px value as well, lots of confusion in the boat. But you know, they have less interest in all that tecnical stuff. Now it's just 34 or 36 B2 lets go, end of the run actual, thank you, No for us zero off is really good..
  3. Ok, since I started the post and I saw some ppl saw it as bashing, feel the need to clarify a few things.... I really did not want to bash the 200 as such even though I saw that some ppl took it that way. I really love the brand and as said earlier am very happy with my current 196. Now I am from Europe and maybe because of it I am forced to have a different view on a few things... First over here fuel really matters... I mean a gallon here costs almost 7 dollars. Most clubs, make that 95% of the ski clubs and a lot of private boats here remove the fuel tank and have a propane tank installed instead so they have their propane at about what you guys are paying for your fuel. This at a quite high installement cost about 2800 dollars and a bit more fuel (propane) consumption and about 10-15% less power. Oh they say it is also quite bad for the valves and reduces longetivity. But not sure about this because saw some club boats with more than 2000 hours with no problems. Apparently the valves run a bit hotter and the valve settings don't like it too much, but then again there is no carbon deposits on them, engine stays increadibly clean, after 1500 hours the one I saw opened looked like new. (anyway different topic) Still they do it because otherwise the clubs wouldn't be viable... the season is already quite short over here and I don't know in the us but over in Europe have the impression that 3 event skiing is becoming less and less popular. And am sure that one of the reasons is that most ppl if you ask them about 30-35 dollars for a 10-15 min pull or the same money for a initiation, quite a few of them will think nice sport, but not for us. Am also sure that it was never a sport for the poor in the first place, but it seems now it going in to the direction that it is a sport for the wealthy, wich in my eyes is also not a good thing. Now just for myself speaking am quite fortunate in the way that my wife and I make enough so that we can use our boat without having to think too much about the fuel price. After 2 full time jobs and 2 kids + a short season we are still able to put about 75 to 100 hours on the boat, and our kids are still too small to ski so amongst the 2 of us it is really quite a lot of skiing, about 3-4-5 times a week. And I could own a 200 as well and the extra fuel it would use ( I heard 20-25% more fuel according to denise from swiss ski school) wouldn't change a thing in our lifestile. But just the fact that knowing that it uses 20% more fuel than the other boats out there is just a psychological barrier and one that I and am sure of it many others are not willing to cross. Now if you look at it from my point of view you might be wandering just like me why are we still using 70s engine technology in 2010 boats. This is not only correct craft, malibu and mastercraft are not doing better. Mastercraft has the vw diesel engine option and I don't know why it isn't a bigger succes. Maybe it is underpowered, maybe it smokes I don't know. But still engine developments have been there,steplessly variable valve lift, variable valve timing, these 2 alone are worth 10-15¨% of fuel saving, then you have the direct fuel injection wich makes for another 5-10%. So basically only these two steps will give a 20% fuel economy. Also with the newer engines you probably wouldn't need a V8, look at bmw pushing 306 bhp out of a 3 liter v6. Again fuel economy. (just to compare a ford mustang gt v8 with 315 bhp uses 17mpg combined a bmw 330i v6 will do about 24mpg thats a 30% increase. So using a modern engine in boats would make us use 30% less fuel it's that simple. Too me it"s a lot and it definately should be the next step in boat building. Also in my club we have about 8 boats and 3 of them are beginning 90/s and 1 2001 from 86 or so. All with original ford engine spinning about 3800 rpm at 36 mph, all 2000+ hours. I might be wrong but let's see how many 200 there will be in 25 years with original engine spinning at 4400 rpm. Am sure that as a promo person who keeps their boat for 1 max 2 years it won't change a thing. But I bought my boat with the intend of never changing it. and again then fuel matters. why are my posts this long??, I-ll stop babbling, a skier from belgium
  4. Hi guys, after reading many stories about the new 200 wanted to give my personal opinion. Have skied behind it last week and must say the wake is truly very good, especiallymy wife who is only beginning in the course liked it very much because of the very smooth and soft wake it produces, especially at low speeds Iwould say. We have a 09 196 ourselves and honestly the wake is even better than ours. And that is where it ends for me atleast.... no 200 has a nice and big love seat to, stitching inside also quite nice, but then again stitching and fabrics of 09-196 almost comparable... But,and know comes the bad, engine noise is painfull, it really is after hearing that it spins more rpm was kind of reluctant to the stories thinking well how much of a difference can 300-400 rpm be anyway. But its a big difference this was with the excal and really was dissapointed at 55 felt like we where doing 64 or somehting, engine is almost maxed out at 58 that is for sure... Now because engine is working really quite hard am also sure of 2 things reliability will go down.... fuel consumption will go up... and that is what kills it for me... beatifull looking boat but would never buy it, would probably opt for a malibu lxi with monsoon engine now, because not only should the skiing be fun, but think the boat driving should be fun and have a sporty feel to it as well. Our 196 feel like a small rocket in comparison+ no more barefooting behind a 200 or you will kill it off in no time, with 196, and especially malibu which feels even faster, shouldbe no problem, not even hurting it. also from a design perspective, a hardcore three event boat shouldn't be that big, who cares if you can stick 6 skis on the sides, i mean honestly how often are ppl really using this. No they actually should have gone the other way, make a even smaller boat then the 196 that would have the performance of the 196 with the small 5.0 liter engine and really make it fuell efficiant, then it would have been a top seller amongst clubs and hardcore skiers. Oh did i mention the trick wake of these boats are not that good, to much air in them makes for very difficult ride... Anywaydon't want to dis correct craft to much because absolutely love the 196i have, knowing that it is flawed for tricks, and really liked the wakeof my previous 1997 196 with gt-40 as well. But if i where to buy now i would go for malibu, good slalom wake, good trick wake, and optional wedge where you can make it beginners wakeboard boat to, fast, reliability over the past seems to be solved, some things still look a bit flimsy, but less so than in the past as well... anyway, don'twant to start a fight thread, just giving my 2 cents...
×
×
  • Create New...